Hi,
Christoph Lange asked (posting attached below) on the wikide-l mailing list
wether there will a fundraising drive shortly before Christmas. He argues
that while it is possible to donate money anytime that it would be more fun
to do this within a concentrated fundraising drive and also that people
around Christmas time are in a donation mood :-)
IMHO advertising the possibility to donate money cannot hurt, especially if we
point out that the money is mainly for paying hosting/bandwidth costs and for
new hardware.
best regards,
Marco
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Subject: [Wikide-l] Spendenaktion für Hardware?
Date: Friday 10 December 2004 19:16
From: Christoph Lange <langec at web dot de>
To: Mailingliste der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia <wikide-l(a)wikipedia.org>
Hallo,
ich finde, die aktuellen Hardware-Probleme bei Wikimedia schreien
wieder nach einer Spendenaktion, ähnlich wie vor knapp einem Jahr. In
der Weihnachtszeit sitzt der Geldbeutel doch locker, oder? Ich wäre auf
jeden Fall bereit, etwas zu spenden :-) Klar kann ich das auch so, aber
im Rahmen einer Aktion macht es mehr Spaß...
Viele Grüße,
Christoph
Hoi,
For whatever reason there is this silly sign that should indicate that a
link is external.
It is a silly thing for two reasons:
*It does not show itself in an IE browser
*When it is used in a language that is left to right like Arabic or
Hebrew, it insists on being on the right side of the word in effect
blocking out the first character.
Could we PLEASE get rid of this silly thing. And if someone insists on
keeping it, could it be fixed so that it behaves properly ...
Thanks,
GerardM
I apologize for the crosspost between two of Wikimedia's mailing lists
in advance, as this is somewhat related to both Wikipedia and
Wikibooks.
One of my pet projects is [[b:Pokémon]], which attempts be a game guide
for everything Pokémon (some at Wikipedia have proposed that all of the
Pokémon articles be moved to the books, but that's not a relevant point
here), and part of any good strategy guide is data and lots of it.
Organizing this data is quite the problem. Here's an example:
One of the subprojects in [[b:Pokémon]] is the guide to the trading
card game, and I need to solicit opinions on how a list of trading
cards should be presented. In particular, what would the Wikipedia
convention be when dealing with large amounts of raw data? Here are a
few ideas I had thought up:
* Each trading card should have its own page. This will make
categorization a trivial task, but will result in too many
substub-quality pages.
* Each set should have its own page, with each page describing the
cards within that set. This will make categorization between sets of
cards trivial, but categorization along other lines (such as the type
of the trading card) a pain in the ass. This goes for giving a page to
any arbitrary group of cards. My personal direction (not necessarily a
good one) is a variation on this theme: the Pokémon cards themselves
are described in their corresponding entry in [[b:Wikibooks Pokédex]].
* Wait until there's a real good Wikidata-like thing before
implementing such an idea.
Part of the problem, I guess, is the lack of contributions from anyone
else in the Wiki community - thus the need to solicit opinions. Plus,
this idea does not have to specifically apply for my project - this
scenario may arise in any other project in the books or the pedia (for
example, a good application of this idea in the pedia is episode guides
for particularly well-known series).
Hello,
Andy Rabagliati wrote:
> I was born in Kenya, my nationality is British, I spent 12 years in the
> USA, and the last 7 years in South Africa.
Ah, I do apologize, but your origins made your focus on only the
Americas even weirder? How's the situation in, let's say, the British
Isles? Or Kenya itself?
little Alex
Tim wrote "Why is Wikipedia so repellant to women? I
couldn't begin to speculate.
Any ideas?"
Might have a couple ones to give.
I do not think it is a question of repellance.
You may notice than the under representation is
particularly critical for a age over 30-35. You may
ask female wikipedians their age to check. Most are
below 35.
The next question would be "do you have kids ?".
Generally, most women over 30-35 do have kids.
Check on google "free time, housework, women, men" and
contemplate results. All studies I know show that at
least in european countries, men enjoy a significantly
higher leisure time compared to women, essentially due
to less time spend on housework chores and children
care. This is especially significant as most
participants to Wikipedia are educated people, which
often implies working people (when over 30)
Ask a working mother how she occupies her time in the
evening versus how a man occupy his time, and I think
it will enlighten you.
This other point is significant as well I think. When
you are an already overworked mom, and your family or
most friends realise the time you spend over
Wikipedia, their comment is at best "you are crazy",
and at worse, "you are damaging your family". This is
not the type of comment a man having a serious
associative activity will get.
When you answer that you also have a brain (and enjoy
using it) and have the desire to participate to "big"
things, not only family and job, as you feel teaching
kids, though a very nice activity is not satisfying
you enough as a participation to the grand scheme of
things, a woman will often get as an answer "but you
can't feel you are useless, look, you have a nice
husband and great kids who need you and love you, you
are very important to them".
Who would ever DARE saying to a man that he should not
feel useless as he has kids to take care of ? Who
would ever dare say a man he should focus on doing his
job well and nurturing his kids before ever thinking
of using his abilities for social activities ?
I feel and resent very much the heavy weight of some
well-thinking people who would perfectly agree women
are just as bright and able than men, but comment with
a touch of despise that it is really not a good idea
not to focus on what is *really* important, family and
job.
I also invite you to reflect on Mark comment
>On a more speculative note, on occasion researchers
suggest that men tend to be more interested in
enlightenment-style "knowledge for
knowledge's sake", while women tend to be more
interested in applied fields (at least in CS and math,
which is where I've read the research). Wikipedia
definitely has interesting social and applied
aspects, but the joy of building a compendium of human
knowledge is very much an enlightenment-style project,
so that might attract a disproportionate number of
men.
There it is as well. Women like less knowledge for
knowledge sake, and more applied fields.
We mostly enjoy what we have the time and opportunity
to like Mark. Most women my age would love do more,
but they are currently running after job hours,
housechores, lice treatment, purchasing socks for the
kids, driving the kids to doctors, to friends
birthday, picking up presents for friends birthday,
cleaning up, cooking etc... This is very practical, it
has to be done. If not done, we see the deep serious
look of society considering this should first be done,
and done well, and fun or enlightement should come
after... when there is time for it.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo!
http://my.yahoo.com
I'll allow others to provide the sarcastic commentary :)
>From Slashdot:
"BetaNews' story says Microsoft tapped Jeopardy! king Ken Jennings,
who recently finished his 75-game run on the show, to become the
spokesman for its Encarta product line. Jennings will embark on a
nationwide media tour called 'Quiz the Whiz' that challenges news
desks to stump the human encyclopedia with questions from Microsoft's
Encarta Reference Library Premium 2005."
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/07/0021254&threshold=3&tid=109&tid…
-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)
Hello all,
I am excited to announce that the Sicilian Wikipedia currently has 113
articles and is growing rapidly!
It actually started very recently, perhaps a week after an ISO 639
code was added for Sicilian, and initially there was only one major
contributor, Joe "Pippu" D'Angelo, who is actually the Chief Finance
Officer in the (Australian parliamentary) Department of the Senate.
However, as it began to pick up speed, it attracted new contributors
including Giuseppi Melfi, in Switzerland, from it.wikipedia, and
others who now contribute regularly.
http://scn.wikipedia.org/
On viewing a photo from the Wikipedia meetup in London last Friday:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:WikiMeet_London_2004-12-03_23.09.jpg
...it struck me how skewed the gender ratio was -- 3 women and about 22
men at that meeting. I looked around for some statistics or discussion
to explain or at least confirm this phenomenon, but I all I found was
blogger Joi Ito remarking that after meeting a few people from the top
of the power structure, Wikipedia seemed to be remarkably gender-balanced.
That, I think, is a statistical anomaly, or perhaps an odd fact of
gender relations -- after all, those women were singled out and elected.
I pondered doing a proper survey, contacting people by email, but the I
realised that there was a less precise but far easier way to get this
information.
The "Viva Wikipedia" community on orkut.com contains 774 wikipedians,
wannabe wikipedians, and people interested in Wikipedia. Unlike on
Wikipedia, orkut members generally give their gender and relationship
status. I downloaded all 52 pages of the member listing and counted the
relevant keywords, which were conveniently given on the member listing
itself. 10 minutes later I had the following results:
"Viva Wikipedia" community membership statistics
Total: 774
Number Ratio
Male 665 85.9%
Female 105 13.6%
Unspecified 4 0.5%
Single 353 45.6%
Married 101 13.0%
Committed 158 20.4%
Open marriage 6 0.8%
Open relationship 11 1.4%
Unspecified 145 18.7%
It would have been nice to have some age and education statistics, but
that information wasn't given on the member listing. The relationship
statistics are roughly in line with Orkut's background demographics. The
background gender statistics on Orkut are:
Male: 1,433,169 48.1%
Female: 1,543,413 51.9%
These were determined using the search feature. The overall proportion
of female web surfers ranges from about 40% to 50% depending on country,
see http://www.itfacts.biz/index.php?id=P1554
The 13.6% figure agrees neatly with the 3:22 ratio observed in London.
Why is Wikipedia so repellant to women? I couldn't begin to speculate.
Any ideas?
-- Tim Starling
I (well, actually my robot) have gone through the English Wikipedia
and searched for pages with Interwiki links. The result can be found
on [[Meta:Common Interwiki links]]. It contains a list with the pages
with most interwiki links (repeated below), but also for the most
commons Wikipedia languages a list of the pages with most interwiki
links that do NOT have an interwiki link to that specific language.
These might thus be subjects that are 'missing' in that language (or
they might be there but unlinked...). Here the list of 100 pages with
most interwiki links. To not overcrowd the list with years and dates,
this list (as well as the others) is restricted to at most 10 years
and at most 5 dates. First are shown the number of interwiki links,
then the title of the page. Thus [[Mathematics]] is the English page
with most interwiki links, having 63 of them, followed by 61 for
[[Biology]] and 60 for [[Chemistry]].
Andre Engels
63 Mathematics
61 Biology
60 Chemistry
59 2004
59 Astronomy
59 Geography
59 Germany
57 United States
55 Physics
54 France
54 May
53 2003
53 Esperanto
53 Europe
53 Internet
53 March
53 Philosophy
53 Religion
52 June
51 January
51 Literature
51 Music
50 European Union
50 February
50 Language
50 September
50 Wikipedia
49 April
49 August
49 English language
49 January 1
49 October
48 Computer
48 Japan
48 List of historical anniversaries
48 November
48 Spain
47 2001
47 2002
47 May 1
47 Sport
46 1991
46 December
46 History
46 January 4
46 List of sovereign states
46 United Kingdom
45 1941
45 1945
45 1989
45 1994
45 Earth
45 January 2
45 January 3
44 1924
44 Belgium
44 Greece
44 Switzerland
43 Canada
43 Mars (planet)
43 Poland
43 Psychology
43 Sociology
42 Denmark
42 GNU
42 Italy
42 Western philosophy
41 Algeria
41 Christianity
41 Computer science
41 Economics
41 Periodic table
40 Africa
40 Archaeology
40 Continent
40 Estonia
40 Hungary
40 Portugal
40 Sun
39 Albania
39 Australia
39 Euro
39 Iraq
39 Russia
38 19th century
38 Architecture
38 Asia
38 Atom
38 Austria
38 Czech Republic
38 Egypt
38 Football (soccer)
38 Gangnihessou
38 Isaac Newton
38 Netherlands
38 Operating system
38 Solar system
37 Encyclopedia
37 Geology
37 Gregorian calendar
37 Hydrogen
37 India
37 Linguistics
37 Romania
37 Wiki
37 World War II
I am fluent in Pennsylvania German and I'd like to do a WIkipedia in it. Pennsylvania German (or Pennsylvania Dutch, High German, or many other names) is spoken by up to 100,000 people in the USA and Canada, mainly in the states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Iowa, and around the city of Kitchener, Ontario. It is a blend of many German dialects but mostly unintelligible to someone who speaks "regular" German (Deutsch). I am a native of the area and, while I'm not a native speaker, I have taught myself the language.
Language Codes:
ISO 639-2: gem
SIL: pdc
Thank you!
Joshua Campfield
Womelsdorf, PA, USA
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
